@article {Martin557, author = {A.R. Martin and J.P. Cruz and C. O{\textquoteright}Kelly and M. Kelly and J. Spears and T.R. Marotta}, title = {Small Pipes: Preliminary Experience with 3-mm or Smaller Pipeline Flow-Diverting Stents for Aneurysm Repair prior to Regulatory Approval}, volume = {36}, number = {3}, pages = {557--561}, year = {2015}, doi = {10.3174/ajnr.A4170}, publisher = {American Journal of Neuroradiology}, abstract = {SUMMARY: Flow diversion has become an established treatment option for challenging intracranial aneurysms. The use of small devices of <=3-mm diameter remains unapproved by major regulatory bodies. A retrospective review of patients treated with Pipeline Embolization Devices of <=3-mm diameter at 3 Canadian institutions was conducted. Clinical and radiologic follow-up data were collected and reported. Twelve cases were treated with >=1 Pipeline Embolization Device of <=3-mm diameter, including 2 with adjunctive coiling, with a median follow-up of 18 months (range, 4{\textendash}42 months). One patient experienced a posttreatment minor complication (8\%) due to an embolic infarct. No posttreatment hemorrhage or delayed complications such as in-stent stenosis/thrombosis were observed. Radiologic occlusion was seen in 9/12 cases (75\%) and near-occlusion in 2/12 cases (17\%). Intracranial aneurysm treatment with small-diameter flow-diverting stents provided safe and effective aneurysm closure in this small selected sample. These devices should be further studied and considered for regulatory approval. PEDPipeline Embolization DevicePICAposterior inferior cerebellar artery}, issn = {0195-6108}, URL = {https://www.ajnr.org/content/36/3/557}, eprint = {https://www.ajnr.org/content/36/3/557.full.pdf}, journal = {American Journal of Neuroradiology} }